Each film in the trilogy focuses on one of a triumvirate of ancient and evil witches whose powerful magic poses a threat to humans on a potentially global scale. Suspiria dealt with Mater Suspiriorum, the Mother of Sighs and the oldest of the three. Inferno gave us Mater Tenebrarum, the Mother of Darkness who is the youngest. And now we have Mater Lachrimarum, the Mother of Tears who is the most beautiful and possibly most dangerous. Argento took the idea of Three Mothers from Thomas de Quincey's Suspiria de Profundis , which suggests that in addition to the three Fates and three Graces, there are also three Sorrows.
The Mother of Tears has been out of commission for centuries. But then a mysterious urn is dug up during construction by a church. The urn is sent to a Rome museum where Sarah (Asia Argento, Dario's daughter and sometimes his star) and her boss break the seal of the urn, releasing the Mother of Tears and restoring her considerable powers. The return of the Mother of Tears brings chaos and darkness to the world. Crimes increase, people become more violent, and humankind seems doomed. Sarah is determined to find a way to destroy the beautiful but malevolent witch. But, as you can imagine, it's not an easy task. Sarah receives help from an old priest (cult fav Udo Kier) and the ghost of her mother (Daria Nicolodi, Asia's real mother) who, Sarah discovers, boasted some powers of her own but not enough to protect her from the Mother of Sighs years ago.
Mother of Tears in the weakest link in the Three Mothers trilogy while Suspiria is by far the best - and possibly Argento's best work all around. But even a weak Argento film kicks ass on most of the recent horror fare. Plus even Mother of Tears holds inspired moments and occasional nasty pleasures for horror fans. In an early scene, a woman is stunningly strangled with her own intestines, and the darkness that engulfs the world is chillingly symbolized by a woman who abruptly throws her infant child off a bridge and to certain death. Both of those scenes are effectively disturbing but in different ways.
But as is often the case in Argento's films, the script is often contrived or simplistic as if it was an annoyance for Argento to have to deal with something as mundane as plot. He prefers to operate in a world of dream logic or should I say nightmare logic. Things just happen and there really doesn't have to be a reason. So if you consider yourself left-brained then you will probably be frustrated by this film. But if you can appreciate the nonsensical and fantastical narrative, and excesses that are both intentionally and unintentionally funny, then you'll enjoy the film. For cult fans, Argento constructs a kind of scavenger hunt in Mother of Tears , leaving references to his past films all about. So there's some sloshing through maggoty water a la Creepers , and an eye opening experience that recalls Opera . See how many riffs you can pick up on.
Asia Argento in Mother of Tears with overtures of Opera (Myriad Films)
But some Argento fans may be disappointed by the dramatic change in visual style in Mother of Tears. Part of his appeal has always been his seductively garish visual style. Argento's best work - like Suspiria - had an audacious color palette that leapt off the screen with a kind of Grand Guignol flourish. His earlier films often had bold, violent set pieces that dazzled viewers. His set design and camerawork were also often excessive, and his films were frequently punctuated by the pounding metal score of Goblin. But Mother of Tears has a toned down visual style, less flamboyant, but grittier and bleaker. That might be more appropriate for an end of the world scenario but its far less dynamic.
Two of the bold images from Suspiria (International Classics)
And an image from Inferno display a very different style from Mother of Tears. Just looking at these images from the first two Mother films makes me want to pull out the DVDs and watch them again. (20th Century-Fox)
The lack of a striking visual flair may make the violence seem more crass, and may once again prompt critics to label Argento a misogynist for the violence he inflicts on women (the most offensive act being the skewering of one woman in a particularly sexually manner). Yet I never thought that label was really fair. Yes he inflicts brutal violence but the victims are both male and female, and that's what horror is supposed to do - come up with creative and often offensive ways of killing off characters. In the case of Mother of Tears, it's all about women - women as both victims and aggressors - the men are almost superfluous. Most of the men are downright ineffectual and end up dead by equally brutal means as the women (but I do admit that their deaths don't interest Argento quite as much). The only person taking any effective action against the matriarchal witch is another woman, Sarah. So Argento may victimize women but he also empowers them in perverse ways and shows them as the ones in control of the fate of the world. In this end of the world scenario, it basically comes down to two women. So while some of Argento's violence could definitely be defined as offensive, I don't see it as misogynistic.
Argento defended himself against the criticism of misogyny by saying in an interview : "If you look at most of my films the main parts are given to women. I did four films with my daughter Asia in the lead role. I think that one of the best female roles I have ever cast is Jessica Harper in Suspiria , who is very strong in that movie, and I put Jennifer Connolly in Phenomena . She was only 13 at the time, still very young, and my daughter Asia was very young in Trauma but they were both given dominant roles. So no, I don't see any misogyny in my work... If a murderer kills a woman in my films it is because it is natural to them, they are maybe born like this, but it is not me personally!"
Mother of Tears (unrated but for mature audiences only because of graphic violence and nudity) is not Argento at his best and is probably for fans only. I would hate to have this be someone's first taste of Argento because it is likely to disappoint. And Argento is an acquired taste no matter what so be forewarned - the film is excessively gory and I might even say gleefully so. So although Argento may not be in peak form, he does seem to be enjoying himself and there are still flashes of the old master. In some ways his shorter works for television's Masters of Horror, Jenifer and Pelts , displays more finesse and broader appeal as if the restrictions of the smaller screen and time format forced him to be more focused and inspired. But even after all these years and a few disappointments, I still Love Argento's work and his ability to go where other filmmakers fear to tread, that's what horror is really all about.
Companion viewing: Suspiria, Inferno, Creepers (a.k.a. Phenomena ), Trauma (Asia's first film for her father), Master of Horror episodes Jenifer and Pelts
TRIVIA: Argento frequently uses his own hands for those of the murderers in his films. I couldn't verify if that was the case here or not.
